Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:This is Slashdot, not Politico (Score 0, Offtopic) 420

Yep. Slashdot has become a huge pile of suck lately. It used to be "News for Nerds", now its looking more for "News for Nerd wannabes".

A political bent has been here a long time, but it used to be more even keeled, and the discussion used to be more open. Hell, even Jon Katz was better than some of the political drivel being posted here lately, especially vis a vis "diversity" and gamer gate. The progressive, hipster, and white knight posturing here lately has been sickening.

RIP Slashdot. We used to have logical discussions around here and talk about technology, when culture came up it was viewed from within and around the technology. Well the SJW's are on the march and they've arrived as /.

I'll be signing off now.

Comment Re: noooo (Score 2) 560

In the past 10 years, both a very large wind farm and an Natural Gas power plant have been build with 100 miles of where I live. Hydro is already very well utilized in my state. I am fully supportive of all of that. I'm not going to be marching and shouting NIMBY!

40% of the electricity I use is renewable already.

What we need to build next is a Nuclear Power plant.

I never said I was against renewables or Hydro power. I am against regulations and taxes that spike the price of energy and have severe negative economic impacts.

Comment Re: noooo (Score 2) 560

The problem is you are acting like we'll have to do that _immediately_ when in actuality we'll have to do that over the next 200-500 years.

This means that there will be instances where mitigation will be more effective (and more doable) in the future than acting now to drastically (extremely drastically) reduce our use of carbon to make these changes not take place.

There is a lot of mitigation technology and infrastructure that can be deployed and used in the next 200-500 years to deal with climate change issues.

Comment Re: noooo (Score 2) 560

Regardless of any facts of climate change, it is an undisputed fact that Nuclear Power is waaaayyyyy cleaner in every way (including spreading of radioactive particles!!) than coal powered power plants.

We should be switching to Nuclear in the US because its just BETTER.

Comment Re: noooo (Score 2, Insightful) 560

Yep. Build nuclear power plants or shut the fuck up. I'm sick and tired of hearing "denier, denier, denier" from these people and then when solutions are proposed, they say "hell no, you can't do that". That fucktard RFK jr. even said no to wind power near the carbon sucking Kennedy compound. What the want is to implement economy crushing socialism, actually solving the problem is NOT what most environmentalists really want.

Back nuclear or shut the fuck up. Note: I'm not asking the impossible, climate change luminaries like James Hansen have called for nuclear power to be used.

Comment Re: Established science CANNOT BE QUESTIONED! (Score 5, Insightful) 719

My stance in AGW is that you can bitch all you want about climate change, but if you're not willing to build a bunch of nuclear power plants and shut down a bunch of coal plants, then yes you ARE arguing global warming to advance a political agenda and nothing more.

If you don't back real solutions that can yield real results then I am going to call bullshit on your advocacy.

Slashdot Top Deals

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...